From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264862AbUEVCHQ (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 May 2004 22:07:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264513AbUEVCEZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 May 2004 22:04:25 -0400 Received: from hermes.fachschaften.tu-muenchen.de ([129.187.202.12]:8701 "HELO hermes.fachschaften.tu-muenchen.de") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S264843AbUEVCDj (ORCPT ); Fri, 21 May 2004 22:03:39 -0400 Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 22:16:39 +0200 From: Adrian Bunk To: Tim Bird Cc: Christoph Hellwig , linux kernel Subject: Re: ANNOUNCE: CE Linux Forum - Specification V1.0 draft Message-ID: <20040519201639.GF24287@fs.tum.de> References: <40A90D00.7000005@am.sony.com> <20040517201910.A1932@infradead.org> <40A92D15.2060006@am.sony.com> <20040519152706.GD22742@fs.tum.de> <40AB925C.50001@am.sony.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40AB925C.50001@am.sony.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, May 19, 2004 at 09:59:08AM -0700, Tim Bird wrote: > > First, I'll point out that this spec, as you noted, is still > a work in progress. > > Yes, the rationale is wrong. Thanks for pointing that out. > I'll get it fixed before we release a spec on this. We have > a separate agenda item in our size working group to look at > inline expansions (See section 7.9.3 where it lists candidate > projects that are not started yet.) There is already valuable > work going on in the area of inline reduction, but > unfortunately, we don't have anything to contribute to that > discussion yet. The main problem seems to be that you write much paper instead of simply writing and testing code. Your approach might be a good solution for big projects, but if the changes are relatively simple it's not very useful. > As for the patch, you are correct that the kernel makefile system > supports compilation with -Os, and someone besides us submitted > the patch for that. However, there is more work needed to > validate that the option doesn't break things, on many different > architectures. > > I have reports from the uClinux crowd that use of > the -Os option is fairly typical for users of uClinux, and they > have no reports of breakage. However, we want to take a methodical > approach to validating that use of this option is fully supported > by the Linux kernel. Also, we want to test and report the size > and performance effects of the use of the flag. This work is > not done yet, so the spec. is still under construction. >... If you'd have asked people knowing the code (e.g. by sending an email to linux-kernel), you'd have already known: - the ARM port always uses -Os in kernel 2.4 - the ACPI code is always compiled with -Os in kernel 2.4 - part of the ARM port always uses -Os with "recent" gcc in kernel 2.2 cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed